Replies

I wasn't going to argue tooth and nail to spare him temporary pain and suffering when I knew the alternative. I can't imagine ever being so concerned about his momentary comfort, that I would sacrifice his forever. Now, I sure put out an argument, but again, my husband was the voice of reason and override in this, lol.

If the prognosis for any illness is over 50%, that isn't saying anything bad about the doctor - it is probably that he treats a difficult to treat illness, no? If 100% of those who do NOT undergo the standard treatment die, though, then I would be inclined to risk the 50%. Even ten percent chance of survival is better than 0.

I do not trust experts who give in advice outside of their field... but I'm not sure how that is relevant to the conversation. I thought we were discussing trusting opinions of those who ARE credentialed experts in their field - therefore more than appropriate to give advice pertaining to that field.

Quoting kirbymom:

I do understand the emotional arguementative side as you suggest. To have to see your child have to experience hell is so difficult to be a part of. I probably would have fought tooth and nail if asked to do those things to my child. In fact, I did. When the experts' end results, proven track record, is more than 50% ending in death, I am not too likely going to go with their assessment of a given situation. I am just wondering beyond this type of scenario, why we trust in people who give advice to parents and have no experience in this particular field. This befuddles me on levels I can't even begin to explain.

Quoting AutymsMommy:

I don't understand exactly. Do you mean, would I continue a course of treatment that was making my child uncomfortable and seemingly more ill, and continue to trust that medical advice? Yes, probably - assuming I had done enough research of my own on the doctor and he/she had a proven track record. My son's surgeries were excruciating and required starvation on some level, before he could undergo certain procedures. It was heartbreaking for me to watch; to hear him begging for something to drink or eat and at that tender age not being able to give him that - to watch him so broken from pain that he just looked blankly at the wall. His procedures couldn't/didn't stop because he was terrified or hurting and yes, I trusted the medical advice that we had to carry on, regardless of him seeming more ill and in more pain, if we wanted him to live and live somewhat normally. Trust me when I say that this wasn't easy, as it sounds like you know; as a woman and mother, I tend toward the emotional argument - I was far too concerned with his emotional wellbeing and physical comfort during this ordeal; blessedly, my husband is more of a rational creature. There were many arguments at home during that time, because we were thinking with different ranges in mind (mom wanted son to be comfortable and not in pain; dad didn't care if son was in pain, so long as the end result was that son lived).

Yes, I continued to trust the doctors, on some level and with my husband's help, even when *I* didn't understand and when I didn't like what was said. I still thank God that I/we did, too.

Quoting kirbymom:I understand exactly how you feel. It is a scary place to be in when your child's life in on the line. However, when those same "degree'd" doctors tell you that your child is not sick enough from the drugs of cancer programs and we need to make your child more sick. Do you still trust those "experts"?

Quoting AutymsMommy:

To be frank,to life or death, I don't care if they aren't passionate or understanding. Some of my boy's surgeons lacked bedside manner and compassion entirely (or so it seemed), but that didn't stop them from successfully performing a surgery they had never done, and saving his life. Sometimes you can be incredibly good at something, even if you lack passion. I wouldn't have traded them for a doctor with passion, but with less knowledge or skill.

There are some areas of knowledge that cannot be affirmed without formal education and testing, and I trust that. Things that would be detrimental to others, if done wrong, shouldn't be self-affirmed; that has the potential to be dangerous. If you were on trial for capital murder, would you trust a self educated "lawyer", with no credentialed affirmation of skills, with your life and liberty?

Quoting hwblyf:

That's interesting. I've gone to many "experts" in the field of allergies, and I wouldn't really want to go back (even though I did for years cuz my younger self didn't have the same sense I have now). Passion wasn't their thing. Nor was understanding. Book knowledge isn't everything. You can know something, and not KNOW it. That said, I wouldn't go to a non-schooled doctor, but that degree is only a starting place. And the ONLY reason it's a starting place, is because someone else has affirmed that person has the knowledge, not because the degree gave them more knowledge, does that make sense? I want to know they've gone through and gotten the knowledge they claim to have without having to spend all the time necessary to affirm it myself. I also think that experience gives much more credence to their knowledge, and in the case of your son's surgeries, no one could get the experience without the education.

Quoting AutymsMommy:

It's nice in theory to feel that one needn't have an education in order to be an expert in something, and I will agree to a point, but I'll also disagree - when it comes to something very important (say, life or death), I wouldn't trust someone without formal education in that area; someone who has been taught and tested on that knowledge. For example, when my son had his surgeries, I conferred with experts in lung, cardio, and vascular; sorry, but I wasn't going to trust someone "self educated", even if only for advice on the subject.

Other things - less life altering - sure, why not. Someone who is passionate about, and educates themselves on, the subject or field of their choice. Not sure I would consider them an expert or just very passionate though, if I'm honest.

The post was to gather others' opinions on the word expert and it's definition from their own understanding. That and to point out that parents may, and I stress may and not absolutely, be more of an expert, more than they know, in the field of children and children relatable fields/situations.

Quoting AutymsMommy:

I wasn't going to argue tooth and nail to spare him temporary pain and suffering when I knew the alternative. I can't imagine ever being so concerned about his momentary comfort, that I would sacrifice his forever. Now, I sure put out an argument, but again, my husband was the voice of reason and override in this, lol.

If the prognosis for any illness is over 50%, that isn't saying anything bad about the doctor - it is probably that he treats a difficult to treat illness, no? If 100% of those who do NOT undergo the standard treatment die, though, then I would be inclined to risk the 50%. Even ten percent chance of survival is better than 0.

I do not trust experts who give in advice outside of their field... but I'm not sure how that is relevant to the conversation. I thought we were discussing trusting opinions of those who ARE credentialed experts in their field - therefore more than appropriate to give advice pertaining to that field.

Quoting kirbymom:I do understand the emotional arguementative side as you suggest. To have to see your child have to experience hell is so difficult to be a part of. I probably would have fought tooth and nail if asked to do those things to my child. In fact, I did. When the experts' end results, proven track record, is more than 50% ending in death, I am not too likely going to go with their assessment of a given situation. I am just wondering beyond this type of scenario, why we trust in people who give advice to parents and have no experience in this particular field. This befuddles me on levels I can't even begin to explain.

Quoting AutymsMommy:

I don't understand exactly. Do you mean, would I continue a course of treatment that was making my child uncomfortable and seemingly more ill, and continue to trust that medical advice? Yes, probably - assuming I had done enough research of my own on the doctor and he/she had a proven track record. My son's surgeries were excruciating and required starvation on some level, before he could undergo certain procedures. It was heartbreaking for me to watch; to hear him begging for something to drink or eat and at that tender age not being able to give him that - to watch him so broken from pain that he just looked blankly at the wall. His procedures couldn't/didn't stop because he was terrified or hurting and yes, I trusted the medical advice that we had to carry on, regardless of him seeming more ill and in more pain, if we wanted him to live and live somewhat normally. Trust me when I say that this wasn't easy, as it sounds like you know; as a woman and mother, I tend toward the emotional argument - I was far too concerned with his emotional wellbeing and physical comfort during this ordeal; blessedly, my husband is more of a rational creature. There were many arguments at home during that time, because we were thinking with different ranges in mind (mom wanted son to be comfortable and not in pain; dad didn't care if son was in pain, so long as the end result was that son lived).

Yes, I continued to trust the doctors, on some level and with my husband's help, even when *I* didn't understand and when I didn't like what was said. I still thank God that I/we did, too.

Quoting kirbymom:I understand exactly how you feel. It is a scary place to be in when your child's life in on the line. However, when those same "degree'd" doctors tell you that your child is not sick enough from the drugs of cancer programs and we need to make your child more sick. Do you still trust those "experts"?

Quoting AutymsMommy:

To be frank,to life or death, I don't care if they aren't passionate or understanding. Some of my boy's surgeons lacked bedside manner and compassion entirely (or so it seemed), but that didn't stop them from successfully performing a surgery they had never done, and saving his life. Sometimes you can be incredibly good at something, even if you lack passion. I wouldn't have traded them for a doctor with passion, but with less knowledge or skill.

There are some areas of knowledge that cannot be affirmed without formal education and testing, and I trust that. Things that would be detrimental to others, if done wrong, shouldn't be self-affirmed; that has the potential to be dangerous. If you were on trial for capital murder, would you trust a self educated "lawyer", with no credentialed affirmation of skills, with your life and liberty?

Quoting hwblyf:

That's interesting. I've gone to many "experts" in the field of allergies, and I wouldn't really want to go back (even though I did for years cuz my younger self didn't have the same sense I have now). Passion wasn't their thing. Nor was understanding. Book knowledge isn't everything. You can know something, and not KNOW it. That said, I wouldn't go to a non-schooled doctor, but that degree is only a starting place. And the ONLY reason it's a starting place, is because someone else has affirmed that person has the knowledge, not because the degree gave them more knowledge, does that make sense? I want to know they've gone through and gotten the knowledge they claim to have without having to spend all the time necessary to affirm it myself. I also think that experience gives much more credence to their knowledge, and in the case of your son's surgeries, no one could get the experience without the education.

Quoting AutymsMommy:

It's nice in theory to feel that one needn't have an education in order to be an expert in something, and I will agree to a point, but I'll also disagree - when it comes to something very important (say, life or death), I wouldn't trust someone without formal education in that area; someone who has been taught and tested on that knowledge. For example, when my son had his surgeries, I conferred with experts in lung, cardio, and vascular; sorry, but I wasn't going to trust someone "self educated", even if only for advice on the subject.

Other things - less life altering - sure, why not. Someone who is passionate about, and educates themselves on, the subject or field of their choice. Not sure I would consider them an expert or just very passionate though, if I'm honest.

In regards to a specific child, I agree parents are (usually) the best experts on what is best and going to work well for that child.

For children in general, however, I see the merit in "real" experts - people who have studied large numbers of children over time, who understand concepts and big-picture ideas. I see nothing wrong with getting advice or ideas from these types of people. All parents, no matter how good, can use a little help now and then. (Of course I have a degree in education so maybe I'm just trying to justify my time and tuition, LOL.)

Quoting kirbymom:

And this is where I am going. Who is a better expert on children than a parent?
Why do so many people listen to so called experts about families or about children or about education?

Quoting bluerooffarm:

I hate the term expert. Believing in an expert that has all the answers makes us stop thinking for ourselves. I instead believe there are many people out there with knowledge on a topic, and that they can impart their informed opinion and the facts they have gathered to help others learn about a topic. They become informed by reading or learning about a topic and they are humble enough to understand that they still don't know it all.

Lol - You prove my point quite well. U R a parent. So it would be feasible for me to seek out advice from you as you not only have a specialized field but you have experience to draw from as a parent first in that specialuzed field to be able to give appropriate advice.
Your parental experience is drawn upon and you can say with a certaintity based on that parental experience, a most probable directive scenario to advise from.

Quoting hipmomto3:

In regards to a specific child, I agree parents are (usually) the best experts on what is best and going to work well for that child.

For children in general, however, I see the merit in "real" experts - people who have studied large numbers of children over time, who understand concepts and big-picture ideas. I see nothing wrong with getting advice or ideas from these types of people. All parents, no matter how good, can use a little help now and then. (Of course I have a degree in education so maybe I'm just trying to justify my time and tuition, LOL.)

Quoting kirbymom:And this is where I am going. Who is a better expert on children than a parent?
Why do so many people listen to so called experts about families or about children or about education?

Quoting bluerooffarm:

I hate the term expert. Believing in an expert that has all the answers makes us stop thinking for ourselves. I instead believe there are many people out there with knowledge on a topic, and that they can impart their informed opinion and the facts they have gathered to help others learn about a topic. They become informed by reading or learning about a topic and they are humble enough to understand that they still don't know it all.